Cutting vehicle speeds, particularly at junctions, and improved road surfaces would be the single most effective measures to increase the safety of cyclists on Britain's roads concludes a new report, Infrastructure and Cyclist Safety, commissioned by the Department for Transport (DfT).
The report which brings together all the existing data on cycliing infrastructure in the UK also says that it will take decades of sustained investment to achieve a functional urban cycle network across the country and a willingness to prioritise cycle traffic – the report also warns that piecemeal implementation of cycling infrastructure "is unlikely to be satisfactory".
Slowing down traffic, particularly at junctions, is identified as having the biggest likely impact on reducing cycling casualties in multi vehicle collisions says the report which also points out that this would also reduce casualties for all road users. Suggested methods of achieving this include physical traffic calming, redesigning urban streets in both their appearance and the way they are designed to be used by pedestrians and the wider use of 20mph speed limits.
When it comes to reducing single vehicle collisions involving cyclists the report highlights improvements to road surfaces as being the best way to lower the rate of cycle casualties although interestingly it is slippery road surfaces rather than potholes which it identifies as the biggest hazard.
However it is what the report has to say about other aspects of Britain's cycling infrastructure that will give food for thought to all sides in the debate on how best to provide the right environment for cycling in Britain.
According to the report's authors there is little evidence for the safety benefits of cycle lanes, or advanced stop lines; and while segregated cycle lanes can offer greater safety to cyclists the points at which they connect with the road network can be so dangerous that they negate the safety benefit of segregation, these are just some of the conclusions of a report in to infrastructure and cycle safety commissioned by the Department for Transport (DfT).
-
ASL - limited data, but limited evidence of benefit particularly associated with junctions. Notwithstanding this lack of evidence, ASLs may provide a priority for cyclists and might be applicable where there are heavy flows of right-turning cyclists.
-
Cycle lanes - There is little evidence in the UK that marked cycle lanes provide a safety benefit, although they may achieve other objectives. This lack of evident benefit may, however, represent a lack of quality and continuity in implementation. There is also extremely limited experimentation with, and no reported studies of, kerbed cycle lanes in the UK.
-
Segregated Cycle lanes – Providing segregated networks may reduce risk to cyclists in general, although evidence suggests that the points at which segregated networks intersect with highways can be relatively high-risk, sometimes of sufficient magnitude to offset any safety benefits of removing cyclists from the carriageway. However may be applicable particularly in rural settings.
Measures suggested as effective for improving safety at junctions include cycle pre-signals, continuing cycling lanes across junctions, raised cycle lanes at junctions, installing traffic signals at major roundabouts, and changing the design of roundabouts to slow traffic and to change the turning geometry to a sharper angle as on European roundabouts (thus eliminating the driver's blindspot). All of these measures have says the report had a measureable effect on improving safety for cyclists in other European countries most notably the Netherlands.
Interestingly while the report can seemingly find evidence for the safety benefits fo cycle lanes in other European countries it can find little evidence for their effectiveness in Britain - as the report notes "a lack of quality" may be a factor in that. Perhaps tellingly Britain's best know network of urban cycle lanes London's Barclays Cycle Superhighways is currently the focus of much criticism with poor implementation and the failure to heed safety advice - including many of the measures this report highlighs as being particularly effective - being blamed by many for the recent deaths of two cyclists at Bow roundabout.
The report also has interesting things to say about the design and implementation of both traffic calming measures and cycling infrastructure. While the authors say that traffic calming in general is beneficial to cyclists, they also advise road designers to be aware that features such as road narrowing and speed cushions have the potential for creating additional conflict between cyclists and other road users. Those designing infrastructure for cyclists also need to ensure that it meets cyclists needs otherwise warns the report it risks making a problem worse not better
Infrastructure and Cyclist Safety is part of a wider research project, Road User Safety and Cycling being carried out by the DfT and involved researchers from the Transport Research Laboratory reviewing all the existing literature on cycling infrastructure in the UK. The report can be downloaded from here on the Department for Transport website.
Add new comment
40 comments
Swept corners need to be phased-out. Roads meeting roundabouts need to be radial, with sharp corners, roads and junctions need to be engineered to force traffic to stop and prevent excess speed being carried-through. That way drivers have more time for proper observations. Altogether much safer.
The Dutch have sorted all of this out.
Large vehicles need to be kept out of towns.
@DPU - how on earth is slowing traffic down going to cost the economy and kill more people?? As stated on this thread and in studies, a slower moving vehicle causes less damage in a collision and there is less risk of fatalities.
Our roads are dangerous simply because of poor driving techniques and standards. Drivers have an unhealthy disregard for other road users be they biped, quadraped, two wheels, four wheels whatever. Until this changes it makes little difference what the government does. But slowing traffic down will be a start.
This person also seems unaware of the fact that having more cyclists using bicycles for short journeys and commuting will result in less congestion so that he can drive without having to wait in a queue of other lemmings in his tin box. The health benefits of cycling outweigh the risks by a factor of 20.
I've had a car licence for 30 years and a motorcycle licence for 25 years and have owned and driven cars and motorcycles as well in all that time - still have a car and a motorbike, but I've no intentions of stopping cycling. The person who made the post is a bit of a dimwit.
I cycle through the town of sandwich in kent, which is one big 20mph zone now. On balance, I like it (not meaning to brag but I am normally exceeding the limit myself!)
One day however, doing a constant 22mph away from the toll bridge and all the way back round the one way system, on stopping at junction, a red pick-up driven by a "higher" primate (lets call him "Clyde"), pulled up next to me and said "oi why don't you pull over and let me past instead of slowing us all down"
silence and disdain from me needless to say!
and i'd been right behind another car all the way too!
I have complained to tfl on numerous occasions about one particular junction on my commute at which ASLs are regularly occupied by buses. Not only have the results been negligible but it is clear from the downright rudeness of bus drivers to whom you point out the legalities of parking their huge vehicles in ASLs that they fear no punitive action as the result of any complaint. Ditto the Public Carriage Office and PSV people.
On bus drivers etc I suspect the reason they aren't bovvered is thatthe plod just don't act on the complaints. You should complain to the bus company instead.
Driving a bus has become a fairly insecure and low-paid job, and the drivers are subjected to a lot of bullying and pressure from their deregulated employers. I suspect being the subject of complaints from a member of the public could be a fairly unpleasant experience for them back at the depot. In a way I feel sympathy for them and a better way of impressing on them would be to engage them in conversation to explain the problem. Sadly that won't work in practice because the same pressure to keep to schedule etc forces them to move off as soon as the light goes green.
On ASLs generally, it seems to me most cyclists are unaware of their purpose. Certainly they all bunch up in the lead-in so that access to the ASL gets blocked - they don't realise perhaps that they are quite entitled to spread out across the box. Right now, that would make a huge difference on Blackfriars Junction - the roadworks have swallowed up the cycle lane and if you are not in front of the traffic you will get trapped behind it, going nowhere because congestion has brought it to a standstill.
@Paul M
My father-in-law was a bus driver till fairly recently and I can confirm what you are saying about the pressure the drivers are under: both to keep to time-tables but also to avoid incidents
I saw a comment on another article regarding HGVs from a professional driver bemoaning the long hours and considerable pressure they work under too.
My opinion - tough!
I work in an investment bank (yeah, I know *Boo* *Hiss*) - but there's nothing you can tell me a bout pressure at work to deliver.
None of that excuses carelessness and risk-taking however. The main difference in my business of course is that if you screw up, some money is lost and your own firm crucify you in the courts - as a professional driver someone could be in the hospital and you get a slap on the wrist then back in the cab!
I've found ASLs to be pretty useful. There are plenty of them in Cambridge and most of the time they are free and a lot of cyclists use them. It's much better than sitting next to a car that's signalling left and you're not sure if they'll let you go first or not.
@Rob Bennington
The reference to the stats on hospital admissions was instructive. The main ones on cyclists for those not bothered to look at the link are:
V10 Pedal cyclist injured in collision with pedestrian or animal 106 105
V11 Pedal cyclist injured in collision with other pedal cycle 350 344
V12 Pedal cyclist injured in coll'n with 2-3 wheeled motor vegicle 65 65
V13 Pedal cyclist injured in coll'n with car pick-up truck or van 2,297 2,258
V14 Pedal cyclist injured in coll'n with heavy transport vehicle or bus 150 144
V15 Pedal cyclist injured in coll'n with railway train or railway vehicle 1 1
V16 Pedal cyclist injured in collision with other nonmotor vehicle 15 15
V17 Pedal cyclist injured in coll'n with fixed/stationary object 681 674
V18 Pedal cyclist injured in noncollision transport accident 11,244 11,131
V19 Pedal cyclist injured in oth and unspc transport accident 1,331 1,305
The first column is finished consultant episodes and the second is admissions.
As was pointed out the majority of accidents don't involve collisions. Nearly 5 times as many accidents are noncollisions compared to collisions with any type of vehicle. There are twice as many accidents with other cyclists as with lorries or buses. Although an accident with a lorry or bus is more likely to be fatal they're not the only way you can get hurt or killed. I imagine a lot of those noncollisions are due to frost/ice, potholes, going too fast downhill (I like it as well but it is a big risk - the only major accident I've ever had in 40+ years of cycling was caused by this when I was 15) and bad/stupid cycling.
When I'm going to work through central Cambridge the main thing that worries me is pedestrians who don't look where they're going and other cyclists, with buses next and cars last - there are no lorries fortunately.
There is an idea to reduce all of Cambridge to 20mph and maybe this would help, although a lot of the time the traffic is slower than that in any case. Enforcing it on every side street though is basically impossible.
If we want to keep safe we have to look, look and look again. Something, in my opinion, the majority of cyclists around me don't do. The same applies to car and other drivers of course. Attention to the road is the key to safety beyond anything else.
Intersting article in Sussex on the reduction of speed limits.
Motorists travelled faster along a road after the speed limit was reduced, a traffic survey has found.
In one Sussex village drivers travelled at an average speed of 33.5mph when the legal speed limit was 40mph.
But when the limit was dropped to 30mph they increased their average speed to 42.5mph – an increase of 20%.
This took place in Town Row, near Crowborough.
A similar situation occurred along the main C7 road connecting Kingston and Newhaven.
The average speed drivers travelled along this road was 41.2mph when the speed limit was 60mph.
But when it decreased to 50mph the average speed vehicles travelled at increased to 48.1mph.
In Dane Hill, near Haywards Heath, drivers travelled at an average speed of 38.7mph when the speed limit was 40mph. But when it decreased to 30mph the average speed vehicles travelled at increased to 39.2mph.
The situation emerged following an East Sussex County Council-organised traffic consultation, ahead of planned roadworks.
The survey found that in areas where there were engineering measures notifying drivers of speed limits, motorists were more likely to stick to the designated speed.
In areas where there were just road signs and markings, the situation was not so clear cut.
The report said: “Figures indicate that the use of engineering measures is more effective in achieving speed reductions.”
An East Sussex County Council spokesman: “Average speeds have reduced at the majority of rural sites where monitoring has taken place.
“Reductions were recorded at all of the sites where there were changes to the road layout and at five of the eight sites where only signs and lines were introduced.”
Areas where speed limit changes are planned in 2012/2013 include the A259 at Eastbourne (50mph to 40mph), A275 South Chailey (extending the 40mph limit) and the A2770 at Eastbourne (40mph to 30mph).
I use the C7 regularly but will only cycle on it early Saturday or Sunday mornings when there is little traffic. I thought the drop to 50mph was a good thing until I read everyone is going faster.
Pages